1. Impact of NSES on Curriculum: I. Department of Geosciences, SFSU II. An Informal Survey III. What Accounts for the Change? IV. What Set the Stage? V. What Obstacles Loomed? VI. The NOVA Program VII. A NOVA Course Proposal: “Planetary Climate Change” VIII. Conclusions “Planetary Climate Change”, A Geosciences Course …

2. Impact of NSES on Curriculum: Dave Dempsey, Karen Grove, Lisa White Dept. of Geosciences Kathleen O’Sullivan Dept. of Secondary Education San Francisco State University “Planetary Climate Change”, A Geosciences Course for Preservice Secondary Science Teachers (and Others)

3. Department of Geosciences n Geology (8) n Meteorology (3) n Oceanography (2) San Francisco State University

4. n General Education (large) n Undergraduate majors (medium to small) n Graduate (M.S.) (very small) PROGRAMS n Traditional lecture & lab styles, mostly n Smattering of alternatives n Occasional co-teaching (esp. graduate) TEACHING Dept. of Geosciences, SFSU

5. An Informal Survey of SFSU colleagues Question: How do you choose the material you cover in your introductory classes? Answer (last year): Use criteria other than NSES: 13 Use NSES: 0 Answer (today): Use criteria other than NSES: 8 to 10 Use NSES: 3 to 5

6. What Accounts for the Change? n Summer 2000 Geosciences Institute (SFUSD) n Fall 2000: “Planetary Climate Change” –national standards for teaching, assessment, earth/space science content n Planned courses –Physical Science (preservice K-8 teachers) –Earth System Science (lower division GE)

7. What Set the Stage? n Dissatisfaction with GE student attitude and achievement (widely shared) n Serious need for more, better K-12 science teachers n New California state standards for preservice secondary science teachers –geosciences breadth courses at SFSU inadequate n Alternative pedagogies –active, students centered –instructional technologies n Assessment and evaluation

8. What Obstacles Loomed? n No formal training in pedagogy, assessment n No local models of alternative teaching strategies n Collaboration difficult--institutional barriers –psychologically tough doing it alone –interdisciplinary approach requires multiple expertise n Resources limited (especially time) n Instructional technologies technical, time- consuming Conclusion: need helpSolution: get grant

9. NOVA (NASA Opportunities for Visionary Academics) n Vision: Change higher education to enhance science, math, and technology literacy of pre-service teachers n Objectives include: –promote NASA’s model for preservice SMT teacher education, aligned with: n NASA’s Strategic Enterprises (Earth Science, Space Science, etc.) n national standards and benchmarks

10. NOVA (cont’d) n Grant proposal requirements for new courses –address national standards –employ innovative instruction (active, student-centered) –develop course assessment plan –integrate instructional technology –connect to systemic reform efforts –connect to NASA’s Strategic Enterprises –take an interdisciplinary approach –form collaboration among content & education experts –attend 3-day workshop (brainwashing about above items)

11. NOVA Course Proposal: “Planetary Climate Change” n Course Outline –What is climate? –How has the climate on Earth (and Mars and Venus) differed in the past? How do we know? –How does Earth (Mars, Venus) behave as a dynamic system? –How does climate change? –How can we predict future climate? n NOVA requirements (including NSES) all achievable n Leverage the NOVA experience –develop new courses, get more grants for more support

12. Morals of Our Story: Lessons of Earth/Space Science Standards n Standards alone have little impact n Standards better in context of systemic reform n Standards strongly invite interdisciplinary approach –collaboration n Must want to change teaching/learning n Need moral & resource support to make big changes –collaboration n Grant support can encourage use of standards n Get momentum from initial, grant-supported efforts –collaboration